Nokia gave a clinic yesterday in the art of screwing up a product launch. The company introduced two sleek new smartphones running Microsoft's Windows Phone 8 operating system, the Lumia 820 and Lumia 920. The 920 features a camera designed to match the capabilities of a real SLR camera. The device's imaging capabilities were touted as "a core area for differentiation" for what is intended to be the "flagship Windows Phone 8 smartphone."

But Nokia, with partner Microsoft at its side, mangled the launch in two key areas. The first problem was obvious, and immediately noted by those watching the event: no details about the price, release date, geographic availability, or carriers that will sell the phones were released. There is even confusion over whether 4G LTE will be supported.

Launching products without these details is sadly common in the consumer electronics industry (take, for example, Microsoft’s Surface tablet launch). It's especially unfortunate for Nokia and Microsoft, which are trying to build up the tiny Windows Phone market share against the iPhone and Android. But more embarrassingly, it turned out that a 90-second promotional video Nokia used to demonstrate the phone's imaging capabilities included several faked shots. Nokia wasn't confident enough in the phone camera's abilities to show off real-world results at its big launch.

The Verge caught Nokia in one fakery, a portion of the video in which a model is riding on a bicycle while being filmed—viewers are led to believe—by the Lumia 920's PureView camera. The phone camera can “record 1080p video, and both the lens and assembly are mounted on tiny springs to help keep it stable even if a jittery person is holding it," we noted yesterday in our coverage. The technology is called "optical image stabilization."

But the Lumia camera wasn't used at all in the video. In a reflection of a trailer window in the background, The Verge noticed a “big white van with a lighting rig and a cameraman standing in the doorway—with what appears to be a large camera rig."

"In an effort to demonstrate the benefits of optical image stabilization (which eliminates blurry images and improves pictures shot in low light conditions), we produced a video that simulates what we will be able to deliver with OIS," Nokia said. "Of course, hindsight is 20/20, but we should have posted a disclaimer stating this was a representation of OIS only. This was not shot with a Lumia 920. At least, not yet. We apologize for the confusion we created. We are looking forward to bringing the Lumia 920, with PureView optical image stabilization to select markets later this year."

Nokia could argue that the video doesn't say the shots were taken with the Lumia. Although it's clearly and explicitly an ad for the Lumia, the shots compare footage with OIS "on" or "off." Technically, it's possible OIS technology was used, but without a Lumia phone.

Still, Nokia had to apologize, and that's never a good sign after your biggest product launch in months, if not your biggest one of the whole year. The trickery involving the model on the bike was designed to show off the phone's video-taking capabilities. After Nokia's confession, other people started looking at still images shown in the video, concluding that they were faked as well.

A designer named Youssef Sarhan did an analysis of the photos shot in Helsinki, including this one, a still from the faked video:

The technical analysis itself wasn’t conclusive, but it prompted a reader on Hacker News to share a photo of the photo shoot. The photo shows some lighting equipment and, just barely visible on the left edge, the legs of a tripod and a camera lens that is most definitely not from a smartphone:

We asked Nokia about this seeming proof that the still images weren’t shot with a Lumia. The company told us, “Contrary to information posted on some blogger and technology websites, all still images found on the PureView page on Nokia.com were taken using a Nokia Lumia 920 prototype phone.” This statement ignores the fact that the analysis was of the still images in the promotional video, and not the images on Nokia's website. Nokia did not deny that the above still—which is not on Nokia.com but rather in the video uploaded to YouTube by Nokia—was faked.

In its apology for the trickery it did admit to, Nokia provides what it said is an authentic (if less stunning) video demonstrating the 920’s OIS capabilities:

The technology will probably turn out to be a worthy addition to the smartphone market, even if the way it was revealed was embarrassing. With Microsoft counting on Nokia to build the premier handsets for Windows Phone software, we’d expect Microsoft to lean heavily on Nokia to make sure this kind of trickery doesn’t happen again.

140 Reader Comments

There was Ars own picture of an iPhone 4 and Lumia 920 taking a picture of flowers in low light. Lumia blows the iPhone to bits. Nokia ad goofed up, but the fact remains - today Lumia camera is the best in business for smartphone cameras.

This is probably their last shot at this smartphone thing. They're heavily bleeding money and losing marketshare. By stretching the truth to sell a secondary feature they made the entire launch event about them lying to customers. That was the big story yesterday, not the new phones or the OS.

There was Ars own picture of an iPhone 4 and Lumia 920 taking a picture of flowers in low light. Lumia blows the iPhone to bits. Nokia ad goofed up, but the fact remains - today Lumia camera is the best in business for smartphone cameras.

Anandtech took that picture, and he's pretty positive about that phone. However, he's a big fan of Windows Phone, which may or may not be true of ars.

Most advertisements don't show exact product function. Be it a food product, home appliance, car, or smartphone. They are typically simulations to give you an impression of what the product is like.

If this were anything other than a Nokia/Microsoft product, no one would give a damn and would have just gotten on with their day. This is like people complaining that milk doesn't pour over their Cheerios like it does on TV.

I'm sorry, were the demos during the event faked? You know what, I don't actually think they were. In fact, I think they showed off exactly what the camera is capable of doing. The video flub is basically a non-issue since I don't think anyone ever said "WE SHOT THIS ON A 920!" If you let your imagination believe that they did, well that's your fault. I concede that they should have been upfront, stating that they were only showing off the technology, not the device.

Like others have posted, virtually all ads are fluffed. Look at magazine covers (Photoshop), ads for foods (prepared to perfection on a set, not in an actual store), and even the lighting in dressing rooms (purposely lit to make you look more attractive).

The purpose of the ads is the CONCEPT. It's like no one here understands marketing. It's also worth noting that Apple does not receive this same level of witch-hunting over their Siri ads, which show Siri working instantaneously every single time. Probably because it's not a big deal, they're simply showing you the concept of Siri. The commercials (and the Nokia video / stills) are not a fact sheet.

All this does is further cement my adamant position of not buying anything I haven't actually used. Even if it's just a new version of something I already have.

One of the wisest comments ever. You don't buy a house without inspecting it, you don't buy a car without driving it. Don't buy a phone without trying it out. Whether you're impressed with PureView or think Nokia is shamelessly faking it (news flash, they're not), you need to try the device yourself.

Don't blindly follow what your favorite reviewer says. They will be biased either for or against a device before they even try it.

The purpose of the ads is the CONCEPT. It's like no one here understands marketing. It's also worth noting that Apple does not receive this same level of witch-hunting over their Siri ads, which show Siri working instantaneously every single time. Probably because it's not a big deal, they're simply showing you the concept of Siri. The commercials (and the Nokia video / stills) are not a fact sheet.

The Siri commercials are sped up for time, true, but they are still using the actual Siri!

The Nokia commercials are not using the actual product even though they are meant to convey the phone is taking that video.

I love how you threw MS under the bus as well... Without any evidence it would appear that this was Nokia 100% and probably had nothing to do with MS except the phone runs windows phone software.

I'm not sure who suggested it was Microsoft's fault, but Microsoft and Nokia worked closely together on this launch, and Microsoft is investing a lot of money in Nokia as part of the Windows Phone technology partnership between the two companies. Microsoft is heavily involved with Nokia, and can exert influence on them.

I'm sorry, were the demos during the event faked? ... The purpose of the ads is the CONCEPT. It's like no one here understands marketing. ... The commercials (and the Nokia video / stills) are not a fact sheet.

I think your points do less to defend Nokia and more to underline how poorly consumers are protected from misleading advertising. It's not good for people's minds and not good for marketers to encourage widespread cynicism about advertising. And the general public became aware of fudged glam pics well after it was common industry practise. That people should know better is not a just expectation.

If a reasonably intelligent layperson's natural, naive interpretation is that the shots are made with the phone's camera, then any info to the contrary should be comunicated explicitly. In leu of fine print disclaimers, perhaps show the pro photog using his expensive rig while waxing poetic about the wonders of OIS and how he'd be super excited to have the tech in a phone camera. Then is clearer that the nice pics are examples of the tech itself, and not the phone in action.

Groan...that's it...keep apologizing for the asshattery that these big corporations keep displaying. This isn't "promotion," it is lying. Full stop.

Gimme a break. There is a clearly fictional story, depicting 2 people who clearly are not Nokia employees, using a device wthout prototype stickers on it. This is fiction. It's made to communicate a point.

Groan...that's it...keep apologizing for the asshattery that these big corporations keep displaying. This isn't "promotion," it is lying. Full stop.

Gimme a break. There is a clearly fictional story, depicting 2 people who clearly are not Nokia employees, using a device wthout prototype stickers on it. This is fiction. It's made to communicate a point.

But its a Nokia ad.

Sorry they should get it right and be honest about it, as should everyone else.

In leu of fine print disclaimers, perhaps show the pro photog using his expensive rig while waxing poetic about the wonders of OIS and how he'd be super excited to have the tech in a phone camera.

And if they did that, people would be commenting on how boring and uninspired the commercial is. I did not personally make a decision on whether or not the video was shot using a 920, because if it were, Nokia would say that. You show me a great, non-shakey, video from someone in motion and my first reaction is going to be that it was taking with a pro camera. Why? Because as a reasonable person I am conditioned to expect low quality motion control from a phone camera.

I think what is hanging up most people is that, as internet users, we expect everyone to tell us everything. The real world doesn't actually work that way. Traditional marketing doesn't work that way. I dunno, I just don't think it's a big deal. No one died in the making of that commercial, and the PureView tech still works as advertised in the examples (at least based on reviews so far).

I'm not really clear on how you can test the camera properly before buying. Can you ask the shop to pull down some blinds and switch off the lights?

Some things are harder to test than others, sure. 30-day (or similar) trials are pretty common. Use reviews and in-store tests to narrow the selection, then give your top pick the more intensive trial.

The question is whether a reasonable person would believe it is real. I think a reasonable person would conclude that, no matter how good the 3D is, actual fish will not swim out of your TV. Just like a reasonable person would conclude that eating a peppermint patty will not take you to a snowy mountain top, and drinking Corona will not transport you to a tropical island.

A reasonable person might, however, conclude that demonstration video shown in an advertisement for a device that records video, was recorded with that device.

If a reasonable person is deceived, it's false advertising. (PS: a reasonable person would not conclude that this constitutes legal advice.)

Most advertisements don't show exact product function. Be it a food product, home appliance, car, or smartphone. They are typically simulations to give you an impression of what the product is like.

If this were anything other than a Nokia/Microsoft product, no one would give a damn and would have just gotten on with their day. This is like people complaining that milk doesn't pour over their Cheerios like it does on TV.

I think you've nailed it on the head. I don't know of any advertisement that uses actual equipment, images ext. Apple never uses the real siri, the never use anything but simulated images. LG, Smasung et. al do the same exact thing for screens and TVs. Sure Nokia goofed and didn't add the disclaimer. Ok, but its not that big a deal.

This smacks of either hating on MS and WP8 or hating on Nokia.

Apple got smacked with a lawsuit for false advertising over Siri and it didn't get anywhere near the publicity or hype this is!